another movie review: shutter island

For those who swear by Martin Scorsese and have had the chance to watch some of his defining works like Raging Bull or Taxi Driver, Shutter Island will be a huge let-down. However, if you don’t have the baggage of expectations and are going to watch it like any other movie, it might just be interesting enough. Probably the weakest of all Scorcese movies till date, Shutter Island fails on multiple counts. The oft-repeated premise of mentally unsound characters offers the film-maker the liberty to introduce outrageous and absurd twists to the narrative. The whole movie builds up towards that final ‘revelation’ and the more implausible it is, the better (an instance of this was the recent ‘Karthik calling Karthik). Such films rely more on ‘shock-value’ than anything else. Shutter Island also falls into the same category, except that it is more adeptly handled and has some superior production values. Leonardo Di Caprio plays the familiar role of the shrewd and calculating cop yet again and is adequate. However, like most of his other roles, he does not add any extra dimensions to the character he plays, and it doesn’t stay with you beyond the two hours of watching him act. Ben Kingsley is wasted in an ill-defined role, which is probably because the script intends it to be so. There is nothing remarkable about any of the other performances, the actors just come and go, again, serving as bits and pieces of a mysterious puzzle. There are many other flaws in the script but revealing them here would take away the surprise element, hence I’ll desist from doing so. Despite all these drawbacks, the film does keep you hooked, the pace doesn’t slacken and you will be curious to know ‘what’s going on’. The cinematography is excellent and the ambience does give a sense of foreboding throughout the movie. And while the concept may be outlandish, it is definitely fresh. To conclude, Shutter Island can be viewed once, but it isn’t the sort of movie you’d remember one year down the line. For Scorcese fans, don’t watch it expecting a Taxi Driver, ‘Raging Bull’ or ‘After Hours’ or even a ‘Gangs of New York’, and you may not be so disappointed.

movie review: Rajneeti

Often, movies which boast of ensemble casts and are preceded by tremendous hype fail to live up to the expectations of the audience. The expectations become magnified, and even an average effort turns out to be a box office dud, simply because the viewer comes expecting the moon and ends up getting a street-light, or sometimes, being left in the dark.


Rajneeti, however, does not disappoint. Yes, maybe it will be slightly disappointing for some who expected a landmark movie, what with arguably one of the most explosive assembly of great actors. But as I said earlier, it may not be the moon, but its one powerful halogen lamp nevertheless. Tapping into one of the best stories ever told, the Mahabharat, the film is backed by a powerful and taut script. The complexity of the characters is suitably maintained; with each of the protagonists showing their dark sides. The most powerful role is reserved for Arjun (Ranbir kapoor) which speaks volumes of his star power. However, while he is more than competent in the role, you get the feeling that perhaps the underplaying had to be toned up a bit. The absolute lack of emotions the character is supposed to have is a bit far-fetched. All the more so when his entry into the big bad world of politics has been dictated by the desire for vengeance. There is ample similarity between Michael Corleone of Godfather 2 and Arjun. But even though Michael was also shown as being reticent and unmoved, Al Pacino made him much more human and sensitive than Ranbir Kapoor. Maybe it’s unfair to compare Ranbir Kapoor with someone like Al Pacino, but he has shown enough evidence of his acting skills in some of his previous movies. So, the restraint could have been loosened up a bit, to give him more opportunities to display his acting skills.

As for the rest of the cast, there are three actors who contribute significantly; Manoj Bajpai, Ajay Devgan, and Arjun rampal. Nana Patekar doesn’t have a lot to do while Naseeruddin Shah seems to have turned up in a blink-and-a-miss role for reasons best known to him and the director. A lot has been said about Katrina Kaif in the media,which isn’t entirely unjustified. This is easily her only good performance, apart from Namaste London. However, that is as far it goes, a particularly bad actress coming up with a competent performance.
Ajay Devgun has that familiar tortured look throughout the movie, which has become his forte. He doesn’t disappoint, but you are too used to seeing him in the role of the wronged and upright individual. Arjun Rampal, again, like Katrina Kaif is not much of an actor. So, you’d be pleasantly surprised by his performance, hugely aided by a role which most actors would die for.


Finally, the best thing about the movie, Manoj Bajpai. It’s sad that an actor of his caliber is languishing in the sidelines after his outstanding performances in Satya, Shool, Dil Pe Mat Le Yaar, and many more. Coming to the fore after a long hiatus, his is the character which stays with you for long after you’ve seen the movie. Agreed, he is over the top and melodramatic at times, but his role requires him to be so. A marvelous performance, even by his high standards, which makes it one of the high points of the movie.

For those who have been following Prakash Jha’s movies in the past, like Damul, Mrityudand, Gangajal, Apharan etc., the most noticeable aspect of the movie is the absence of a socially relevant theme and message. Unlike his earlier movies, which tackled burning social issues, Rajneeti is plain and simple story-telling. Though it’s a great example of entertaining and engaging cinema, it doesn’t stir up emotions, like the frustration and anger aroused by the helplessness and victimization of Ajay Shastri in Apharan, the despair on witnessing the realistic and tragic practice of bonded labor in Damul, nor does it give you an adrenaline rush felt with the social upheaval engendered by SP Amit Kumar of Gangajal or the rebellion of women against atrocities from Mrityudand. It does tackle the issue of the power hungry politics, but it does so dispassionately, and doesn’t offer any new perspectives. It’s more a tale of a family torn by internal strife than a depiction of the political quagmire in our country. All said and done, Rajneeti is definitely worth a watch, and probably, one of the best Hindi movies of this year.

By the way, an added incentive is the manner in which the beautiful city of Bhopal is shown throughout the movie.

Strikes and protest: changing perceptions

Trade unionism and organized protests in recent times have become a pariah, an object of disparagement. In the media and middle-class consciousness, it’s begun to symbolize an impediment to progress. The roots to these perceptions lie in the disenchantment with the public sector industry, which is now deemed to be an inefficient burden on the country’s exchequer. The strikes in the textile mills of Mumbai, the fall from grace of the state of West Bengal from the map of industrialization and development, the corruption and inefficiencies of government undertakings are all somehow attributed to trade unionism. And this isn’t necessarily untrue. The PSU and government employees who could ostensibly get away with anything and the bureaucracy who plague our government machinery have survived without much effort largely because of the unions. We have iron ore mines running for decades when the entire resources have been depleted, just so that the employees’ salaries can be paid, we have sick units dragging on without any hope of a turnaround just because the unions won’t allow their closure; and we have the all-too-familiar blackmails by providers of essential services to have their just or unjust demands met. Lately, there have been voices which have called for ruthless handling of any voice of dissent. Aided by the media which panders to the views of a minority which unfailingly opposes any hindrance to their comfortable lives, the opponents of public protests are having a field day. In the absence of any support, unions and protestors have to face the brunt of opposition from all quarters.


These tendencies are now leading to a situation wherein even the legitimate demands of protestors are quashed without any opposition. A recent instance was the way in which the strike called by the employee unions of Air India was dealt with. Not many are aware of what prompted the strike in the first place. An extremely biased and melodramatic reporting focused only on the trouble faced by the commuters, and the contention that a strike just after a major disaster involving the national was unjustified. The fall-out was the termination of striking employees and derecognition of Air India employee unions. The rhetoric of the management and the aviation ministry was facilitated by a sympathetic media and its consumers who were not willing to compromise on their convenience at any cost. Nobody really cared about the standpoint of the striking employees, there was unbridled rejoicing when the strike was forcibly brought down, considered to be a vindication of the media and airline consumers’ opinions.

What actually happened, what prompted the Air India employees to go on a strike a day after one of the biggest tragedies visited in the history of Indian passenger aviation? While trouble had been brewing for long regarding non-payment of salaries, which in itself is more than a good reason for calling off work, the flash-point was a gag order implemented by Air India management, restraining its employees from making any unauthorized statements regarding the carrier. It went on to suspend an employee who had raised a question about the certification process of an aircraft’s flight-worthiness. Apparently, the ill-fated Mangalore aircraft was cleared for flight by a team of engineers from Kingfisher Airlines. The suspended employee had questioned the credentials and qualification of the team and the very practice of a private body performing such a sensitive task. Even though the crash did not occur because of any aircraft snag, the point raised was quite valid. As regards non-payment of salaries, it would be insane to expect someone to carry on working without getting the wages on time.

In spite of all these valid arguments, the employees’ strike was met with impatience and high-handedness, and the calling off termed as a victory for the airline management. In truth, it was an unjust repression, which shows the changing face of India’s work ethics.